On Sun, 23 Mar 2003, Kevin Brown wrote:
> Joe Conway wrote:
> > Jason Earl wrote:
> > >>Actually, I think it was someone else (Joe???) that is doing the leg
> > >>work, and he was the one choosing explode / implode and getting
> > >>gruff for it, so I was just stepping in and defending his decision.
> > >
> > >Oops, my bad. My brain must already think that it is the weekend. My
> > >reasoning still stands, though. Whoever writes the code gets to pick
> > >the names (assuming, of course, that they can get them past the rest
> > >of the PostgreSQL hackers).
> >
> > <dons flame proof suit>
> > Yup, that was me. I was watching from the sidelines ;-)
> >
> > I'll get on with coding and try to consider all of the input when it
> > comes to picking the names. In the end, it will depend on whatever the
> > guys with commit access will live with, so I'm not going to worry about
> > it too much.
> > </dons flame proof suit>
>
> My 2 cents:
>
> Use "split" and "merge". Avoids the "join" issue and avoids the
> "implode/explode" issue too. :-)
Isn't merge a new SQL keyword in SQL99 or SQL03?
